I have been playiong for nearly two years and enjoyed Factacular tremendously and learned lots of stuff. Whe I first came onto he site I liked it better. I found that the topics were more interesting for a few reasons and I think we ought to consider these reasons carefully. I really don't want any out of hand anti-wabzy objection on this. I want a bit of consideration given to what I am saying because quite a few people agree with me and I know it was friendlier site 2 years ago than it is now. Now, I don't want anyone getting into a snit about what I have to say. These are suggestions.

1)I think the number of entries in any topic should be limited to a reasonable number. Arbitrarily, I would say perhaps 40-50 is a good number to aim for. This is a number of facts which is manageable for people to LEARN. If additional facts in the same category are to be added they can be added under fact topic X# and listed as such. I see no heroics in topics with 300 impossible facts to learn. It is discouraging not encouraging, threatenening, in fact and so that is my first suggestion.

2) I don't see any value in certain topics which require an inane memorization of who died at what age of what disorder in what year. Preposterous. Also, long lists of date=answers are equally dull and miserable. Surely a better format must be demanded of these topics, with the soul ecveptiom of historical facts, such as 20th Century Facts, There is little merit in learning , no, memorizing a date. It is rote. It is baby work and dull. I say vote NO for this sort of topic.

3) Whenever possible at least a bit of inmformation should be given to fill in the gap. Even if it is a boxer Antoine X from France let's know he is (hypothetically) a dogcatcher in Paris. We need color. It adds interest. We are getting so bogged down in certain things. How can we remember criminal nicknames when we have bno additional information?

There are other thing that can improve the site. The joy of learning has to be restored. This is a wonderful resource and I do love it. I have given three suggestions. I am sure that other people have suggestions. Please add to my list and let's try harder. I have been a slacker because I like to play all the time and don't contribute. But when I contribute it is usually quite good. I swear I will contribute morwe. People, let's see how good we can make the site. Add suggestions and lets make it a better site than it has become. Thanks for reading this!

With your third point, wabzy, you don't really need to get anyone else's input. Every single member has the option to "add trivia" to a fact with no additional information or edit the information that's there already. Why not lead the way by contributing some additional information?

As for limiting the number of entries to a topic - I agree in part but I think that an arbitrary number is needlessly restrictive. I don't believe that people are incapable of learning more than 50 facts on any given topic. Take the "English - Welsh" topic which I've been adding to week by week. It's up to about 160 facts and it's all vocabulary which I'm finding useful to learn.

Providing facts are of a sufficiently good quality, I don't think quantity is a problem. We already try to limit contributions en masse to a topic where that contribution would make the topic unnecessarily obscure.

As for date answer type topics...well, if you don't like them and find them dull, then don't do them. The site contains something for everyone, I think. That doesn't mean that everything has to be for anyone. Some people will dislike some topics that others love and vice versa. The date style topics do not, as a rule, get included in random brainoffs so nobody is forced to do them.

Anyway, I'm glad to hear you're planning to contribute more and look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Yes, I am planning to contribute far more, Stu, and I don't intend to contribute anything that is not really educational, fun and not necessarily easy, but readily learnable by people in the sense that it is not threatening by the number of items or the set up. meaning date=answer or name=Latin name. They are not MY idea of a fun topic. I only say that an approximate limit, not a cut-off, of questions, has always been associated with the most successful and most well-played and enjoyed topics on factacular.

I am glad to hear you are adding to Welsh-English every week. THAT is good. Now I would really like to hear how some other people feel about this.

You're still planning, wabzy? We discussed some of this stuff privately back in June this year. You were planning to make some amazing contributions back then. You've contributed one complete topic in the meantime (Victorian Language of Flowers - none of the facts in which have additional information).

If you're serious about adding good quality topics with plenty of additional information on each fact then I'll be thrilled to see what you come up with. Why not lead by example so that when other contributors come along we can point them at your latest contribution and say "See? That's how to do it".

I completely agree with you about the Latin names topics. Whether it's tenrecs, shrews, sharks, opossums or Latin Plant Adjectives I find them completely impenetrable. They're not my idea of fun either.

However, they don't need any maintenance and they don't appear in randoms. So, I don't really see how having them there is a bad thing. People are at liberty to play them if they find them interesting or ignore them if they don't. If they do play them then they'll find that they are well-formatted and suited to the style of Factacular.

I don't think it's appropriate for us to start deleting topics based on personal preferences. I don't imagine there can be many people who are interested in Judo Techniques - Translations. For most people, that's probably about as obscure as the Latin names of weevils. However, I find the topic very useful. Sure, when all's said and done it doesn't matter whether I call it the Reverse Cross Strangle or Gyaku Juji Jime because in about 3 seconds I'll be unconscious - but I really should know these names and I find the topic a useful revision guide. If a student zoologist wandered onto the site, they might be overjoyed to see a similar revision guide to help them with their tenrecs. Perhaps that's not particularly likely but the point remains that it's a matter of taste or personal interest as to what subjects are fun. We need to rise above pursuing personal agenda when thinking about this stuff.

That said, the They Died Young topic that you alluded to in your first post ("2008 of tuberculosis" etc) is, perhaps, not a great fit to the format. It could be worth having a look at that one and seeing if there are ways to spruce it up and make it more playable. Maybe just listing the cause of death and removing the year from the equation?

Anyway, I just wanted to respond to some of your points. That's not to stop anyone else from contributing because I'm always happy to hear other people's thoughts on these things - just as I'm always happy to ramble on about mine.

Please note that these are my personal viewpoints on this issue and do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of other members of the editorial team.

I don't propose any deletion. Just an influx of fresh , friendlier stuff. What's wrong with that. You want info on the Victorian flowers, like was each flower looks like or smething, fine. Stu, please don't be a contrarian. This shouldn't be a threat to you. I am interested for MY reasons. So far nobody else seems to give a hoot so don't sweat the small stuff. I already said I wasn't the one in charge so nothing at all may change. Just let it ride its course. let it be. Maybe some good will come out and maybe it won't. You won't know unless you try.

On they died young topic it is just set up to be a spider web to catch ME! You know that! Hahaha! Seriously, that one needs some work. It is a bit fluffy and silly. Having options off by one year is pushing my sanity. I am going back to bed. Raining like hell and all. Talk later. Don't worry about this. Just leave it up and see what others say. Other opinions should count. I AM NOT proposing deletion of anything, unlike some other people. Okay, pushing them to the back doorway, yes, but not out. See you later.

Oh, there's certainly nothing wrong with an influx of fresh, friendlier stuff. I'm all for that and I've been saying that I look forward to seeing what you contribute towards that end. I've said nothing contrary about that at all.

I didn't say I wanted info on Victorian flowers, by the way. I just pointed out that your last contribution, made 10 days ago, didn't match up to the standards that you were calling for.

I'm all for an influx of fresh and interesting topics replete with colourful additional information. I cheer heartily at the suggestion and I will applaud every contribution you make which goes towards leading the charge on it. I don't think there's much discussion needed on this either because we're just talking about adding more quality content. What's needed now is action and leadership.

Of course, if you've got amazing ideas but you don't have the time or the energy to do the work of getting the facts then there used to be a forum topic where you made suggestions for topics in the hope that someone with more spare time on their hands will take it up.

Personally, I'd like to see you come up with everything yourself so I can see what you're aiming for as an ideal - but if that's not viable then you can at least contribute your ideas to the site.

I will do them myself, thanks, Stu. Things will get easier for me now! I like to see my own ideas come out the way I want them to. Are you starting to baddger me, sir? I do hope not. We've been having a nice stretch of fun. Please let's move on now. Thanks for your interest!